I couldn't have done it without the LSAT prep materials and the 7sage admissions advisor, Elizabeth Cavallari's help; to be able to go to law school debt-free and stay near my family is one of the best gifts in the world

I had a 140's diagnostic around January 2020 and was stuck in the 160's since at least March 2020 (with an occasional 170+ score but these were on older pre-J07 tests only-- I only got one 170 score on newer PT)

Like many of you, I was aiming for a 170+ score on the real LSAT, but I was scared as hell because I was stuck in the mid-160's for sooooo long; to be exact, I was stuck at 166 for almost every single preptest in the 70's and 80's

After I took the 2020 August LSAT I continued to study assuming I was going to have to retake for October, and my score actually dropped from 166 to 164 during these past 2 weeks in the last few preptests I took; it made me so sad and scared

Just found out I got a 170 today

So relieved...

P.S. For those who wanted to know how I studied, I have used 7sage (obviously) but never did the CC; I had one hour of tutoring but the tutor just didn't work for me, and I am cash-strapped, so I didn't hire a tutor ever again

In addition-- here are my 2 cents:

Contrary to popular belief, the LSAT is incredibly formulaic; so even if you have no natural LSAT gift (like me), by recognizing what wrong answers look like and what right answers look like, the LSAT becomes almost like math

LEARN from your mistakes; and when I say learn, I don't just mean understand why each answer is right and why each answer is wrong; go one step further by learning WHY you thought an answer was wrong (when it was actually right) and vice versa, and then write down what you learned in a journal and review that journal so that you don't miss questions like that ever again

so many questions on the actual test I think I got right simply because I spent hours/days/WEEKS trying to fully understand a few really hard problems (especially in LR); as a result, on test day, there were so many questions where, while none of the answers looked right, I just picked an answer based on pattern recognition of wrong answer choices that I wrote down in my LSAT journal

it is not about how many PT's you take, but how well you review; the 2 weeks before the LSAT, I spent the entire time just making sure I fully understood PT 88 in its 100% entirety; apparently doing that worked

And lastly, THANK YOU to everyone on this forum who has answered my LSAT questions-- I couldn't have done it without you all

Hi,

Can anyone explain why B is right here?

It seems, when watching JY's explanation, that the reason why B is right is because it provides an explanation for the phenomena-- perhaps the other dinosaur was a baby, and that is why it has T-rex features but small size. However, when I tried to flesh this explanation out, it just didn't seem to work:

if the dinosaur is really old, it strengthens the argument by giving an example of a dinosaur that has T-rex features but is small

if the dinosaur is a baby, it still seems to strengthen the argument by giving an example of a dinosaur that has T-rex features but is small

Thus, even though it does provide an explanation for the phenomena seen in the argument, I don't see how the dinosaur being a baby would provide an alternative explanation that could weaken the stimulus' argument when the argument never gave an explanation for the phenomena in the first place.

Hope that makes sense to people reading this

Any #help would be appreciated!

Thanks!

Hi,

So while I did understand why the wrong answer choices were wrong here, I had trouble understanding why E was right. Can anyone explain their reasoning here?

The reason I had trouble understanding why E was right was because I didn't really know what was the difference between "subjective association" and "possession of concept". I thought that a "subjective association" had to be an association that people made based on their "subjective" (aka personal) opinion, but I didn't see any personal opinion in passage A-- I saw people basing their opinion from the connotations in the languages themselves, not from their unique thoughts/experiences.

In addition, "whereas" in answer choice E indicates contrast between "subjective association" and "possession of concept" yet, from my perspective, it seems like people holding a masculine view of a violin and people holding a rough view of numerical values both seem like "possessions of concepts"-- they are both opinions that people hold.

So how is E right?

Any #help would be appreciated!

Thanks!

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-89-section-3-passage-4-questions/

Hi,

Like many others, I was stuck between A and C here. However, while I do understand JY's explanation that a "claim" does not need support while an "argument" does, I thought A was correct here because the second sentence of the stimulus (the sentence that gives an example of how evolution would optimize survival for moose) does seem to serve as "support" for the idea that "evolution does not always optimize survival of an organism", thus making the evolution thing an argument rather than a claim. Can anyone explain why C is right and not A?

Any #help would be appreciated!

Admin Note:. https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-81-section-3-question-21/

(without deleting all my answers altogether)

Title says it all

Gosh, this question was hard.

Can anyone explain why B is not a weakener?

I thought B weakened because, if most people in the painting did resemble real people from history, then if we follow the author's logic, this would mean that any of those people could also be the painter of the painting.

Any #help would be appreciated!

Thanks!

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-88-section-2-question-24/

Hi,

Can anyone explain why the answer here is A and not E?

I have major trouble understanding why A is right when it doesn't seem to explain why the 52% of people who like the candidate continue to like the candidate-- it only talks about the people who don't like the candidate.

Likewise, E at least seems like it could apply to both groups of people since the people who liked the candidate believed the candidate's excuse while the people who didn't like the candidate may not listen to his excuse.

Any #help would be appreciated!

Thanks!

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-63-section-3-question-26/

Hi,

I have trouble seeing why answer choice E here is wrong-- wouldn't the third sentence here be considered a "generalization", since a generalization is practically the same thing as a general principle, and the idea that "parallel lines often appear to converge" seems to be a general principle-- something that could be applied to multiple instances? In addition, if my aforementioned reasoning is correct, isn't this generalization being "used" to argue against people ridding themselves of tendencies by being used as context for the analogy that the stimulus brings up in the last sentence?

Any #help would be very much appreciated!

Best regards

Gosh, this question is crazy hard...

Can anyone explain how the author is "impugning" the motives of Roehmer in the last sentence? It really doesn't look like the author is questioning/attacking Roehmer's motives at all-- the author is just saying that Roehmer is doing it for her supporters

Thanks!

Best regards

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-84-section-3-question-22/

Hi,

Can anyone explain to me their reasoning about how they approached the correct answer here?

I thought that A (the correct answer) was wrong here because we have no idea why Chopin did not believe in the local colorists' idealization on line 38. Thus, it doesn't have to be because Chopin thought that the local colorists were "misguided" (aka wrong).

On the other hand I thought that B was right because it seemed a little more supported: in lines 32-35, it at least explains why Chopin wrote using local colorists' conventions: because she thought that the sentimental novels she read when she was little were a bit too excessive. In addition, my thought was: why write something that is so emotional in such a detached manner (line 37) unless you wanted to deafen the emotional impact?

Any #help would be appreciated!

Best regards

Can anyone explain why the correct answer here is C instead of E?

My problem with C was that, in order for C to weaken the stimulus, we'd need to assume that the landlords would take out the energy-conserving equipment once they install the energy meters. If the energy-conserving equipment stayed in once they installed the energy meters, then I don't know how any energy would be conserved because the tenants are living within the same energy standard whether they have the meter or not.

Thus, I thought that a better answer would be E. Granted, E does say "some" making it very logically weak, but at least it reveals something that could weaken the argument in the stimulus (which I don't think any of the other answers even come close to doing). If some people conserved energy for non-financial reasons before landlords installed the energy meters, then this would make it more likely that these people would not care about the new energy meters because they never saved energy for financial reasons in the first place.

Thanks!

Best regards

#Help

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-83-section-3-question-16/